A380 first flight on Wednesday!

[Steveair]

Like I said, they were doing things the airplane was not supposed to do. The plane just was not designed to play low passes like that and the pilot did not set it correctly. The plane didn't know what it was doing and the pilot did not take it completely manual in time. In order for an airplane to respond to control inputs, you have to disconnect the autopilot. If you look for the cvr transcripts, you will see that they were having a party in there. The pilot called his buddy saying something like "hey, come up here it's gonna be great." The guy was just standing inside the cockpit watching and obviously died on impact.

You tell the airplane to do something and it should. Pilots should have the ability to overpower the autopilot at any time / any place. I think you'll agree that time, in many aspects of flight, is critical. I don't think that I should have to program a computer to initiate a go around.

I believe Airbus has since fixed this "programming glitch" and installed some kind of cockpit switch so that the pilot has the final say.

What concerns me is the other "bugs" that have yet to be discovered and how many lives it will cost to find them.

 

[R2D cup]

http://www.alexisparkinn.com/photogallery/Videos/Airbus320_trees.mpg

Need I "say" more.

Pilot Error

 

[buckdanny]

You tell the airplane to do something and it should. Pilots should have the ability to overpower the autopilot at any time / any place. I think you'll agree that time, in many aspects of flight, is critical. I don't think that I should have to program a computer to initiate a go around.

I believe Airbus has since fixed this "programming glitch" and installed some kind of cockpit switch so that the pilot has the final say.

What concerns me is the other "bugs" that have yet to be discovered and how many lives it will cost to find them.

Yes, I agree with you that one should be able to take over quick. One main problem when the first 320 came out was the lack of training, and failure from Airbus to list everything the plane does. There has been instances where the plane did something to the surprise of the pilots and it was not in the manuals. Those major bugs were fixed. The problem is that with fly-by-wire technology the pilot has to be one step further ahead of the game as it is a much different environment.

Seriously, there is a ton on the net about that crash in the trees, that explains in details the different aspects of fly-by-wire.

Buck

 

[Hugh Jorgan]

What concerns me is the other "bugs" that have yet to be discovered and how many lives it will cost to find them.

Regardless of who built the thing.

 

[Yank McCobb]

Ohh I see. So those pilots who made a low pass and then tried to apply power but the computer said "no, we're landing" and cut the power. Personally, I think an airplane should respond to control inputs.

.

Read the full report, and get the full story, moron.

The pilots did not "make a low pass and then tried to apply power but the computer said "no, we're landing" and cut the power".

What a stupid, uniformed statement. If you had even 1/16th of a clue as to what actually happened, and why the aircraft reacted as it did, you would know just how stupid that statement sounds.

Go back to your 152. Try and figure it out first, THEN maybe read up on this accident, and the workings of the A-320, fly-by-wire technology, Alpha Floor, etc...etc. And the pilot of that particular flight's huge misunderstanding of the system and huge mistake. A mistake that in a "conventional" aircraft that you so desire to fly, would have most likely resulted in the deaths of everyone aboard.

 

[328dude]

Read the full report, and get the full story, moron.

The pilots did not "make a low pass and then tried to apply power but the computer said "no, we're landing" and cut the power".

What a stupid, uniformed statement. If you had even 1/16th of a clue as to what actually happened, and why the aircraft reacted as it did, you would know just how stupid that statement sounds.

Go back to your 152. Try and figure it out first, THEN maybe read up on this accident, and the workings of the A-320, fly-by-wire technology, Alpha Floor, etc...etc. And the pilot of that particular flight's huge misunderstanding of the system and huge mistake. A mistake that in a "conventional" aircraft that you so desire to fly, would have most likely resulted in the deaths of everyone aboard.

Steve: I'm not one for bashing other people, but really dude. Did you read the accident report on that crash? Your profile shows you being a flight instructor and never flown a transport catagory aircraft. That's great, but making statement's about a type of aircraft you have never flown or how they should be flown isn't very smart.

Is this about you not liking the French rather than the Airbus? Buck was just pointing out that the 380 was supposed to TF on Wednesday, I don't see the point in jumping on him over it.

 

[Steveair]

Yes, I like alot of people in here, read the report on the crash and had a nice, big group discussion on the matter. No, I don't fly transport category aircraft but I still have some knowledge on the subject. For example, I know that Airbus uses hard limits which allow the computer to have the final say. On Boeing aircraft, soft limits are utilized: thus, the pilots have the final say.


Despite what you say, I also know that when the A320 is below 50', it commits to the landing and that's what happened in Habsheim. Did the pilots there know that? No. If they'd been in a 737, would they have been able to do what they were trying to do? Yes!

Assuming that someone doesn't know what they're talking about is a good idea on this site. I can understand if you want me to back it up, but give me a chance to explain before you call me a moron! I'm not an ATP but I only say things that I can back up.

I really don't like the french and I really don't like airbus. Here's the safety record for a few of the more popular aircraft. The numbers speak for themself but if you really want to think, look at the # of aircraft out there and years in service and it REALLY says a lot.

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Boeing 777 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]0.00[/font]
1 [font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Airbus 340 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]0.00[/font]
3 [font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Airbus 330 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]0.00[/font]
4 [font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Boeing 767 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]0.32[/font]
5 [font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Saab 340 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]0.33[/font]
6 [font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Boeing 757 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]0.35[/font]
7 [font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]McDonnell MD-80 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]0.43[/font]
8 [font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Boeing 737 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]0.60[/font]
9 [font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]BAE 146 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]0.64[/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]10 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Airbus 319/320/321 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]0.67[/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]11 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Fokker 100 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]0.71[/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]11 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Embrader 120 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]0.71[/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]13 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]L-1011 Tristar [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]0.91[/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]14 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Boeing 747-400 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1.04[/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]15 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Boeing 727 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1.05[/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]16 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]McDonnell DC-9 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1.29[/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]17 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Airbus 300 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1.34[/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]18 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Airbus 310 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1.83[/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/font]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/font]​

 

[say again]

What concerns me is the other "bugs" that have yet to be discovered and how many lives it will cost to find them.

Don't fly on it then!!! You sound like a complete moron. Do you feel the same way when Embraer comes out with a new A/C, how about Boeing?

What about the 737's uncommanded rudder deflections, 767 reverse thrust deployment in flight, and many more? These were so called "bugs" that cost people their lives. Do you not like Boeing A/C anymore? Things are going to happen no matter who builds it. I personally think that Boeing, Airbus, Embraer, Canadair, and others are exceptional companies who make extraordinary products.

If it happens that you are against Airbus because you don't like the French, then you're even more of a moron. Like others said, it's manufactured all over the world. Same as Boeing, and most A/C.


Sorry Steve, but you need to wake up and take the advice of everyone else on this thread.

 

[Steveair]

Don't fly on it then!!! You sound like a complete moron. Do you feel the same way when Embraer comes out with a new A/C, how about Boeing?

What about the 737's uncommanded rudder deflections, 767 reverse thrust deployment in flight, and many more? These were so called "bugs" that cost people their lives. Do you not like Boeing A/C anymore? Things are going to happen no matter who builds it. I personally think that Boeing, Airbus, Embraer, Canadair, and others are exceptional companies who make extraordinary products.

If it happens that you are against Airbus because you don't like the French, then you're even more of a moron. Like others said, it's manufactured all over the world. Same as Boeing, and most A/C.


Sorry Steve, but you need to wake up and take the advice of everyone else on this thread.

Statistics son.. .statistics. Boeing is a safer, more reliable product and there's proof! Profits... where does the money go. Pride.

 

[say again]

Yes, I like alot of people in here, read the report on the crash and had a nice, big group discussion on the matter. No, I don't fly transport category aircraft but I still have some knowledge on the subject. For example, I know that Airbus uses hard limits which allow the computer to have the final say. On Boeing aircraft, soft limits are utilized: thus, the pilots have the final say.


Despite what you say, I also know that when the A320 is below 50', it commits to the landing and that's what happened in Habsheim. Did the pilots there know that? No. If they'd been in a 737, would they have been able to do what they were trying to do? Yes!

Assuming that someone doesn't know what they're talking about is a good idea on this site. I can understand if you want me to back it up, but give me a chance to explain before you call me a moron! I'm not an ATP but I only say things that I can back up.

I really don't like the french and I really don't like airbus. Here's the safety record for a few of the more popular aircraft. The numbers speak for themself but if you really want to think, look at the # of aircraft out there and years in service and it REALLY says a lot.

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Boeing 777 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]0.00[/font]
1 [font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Airbus 340 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]0.00[/font]
3 [font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Airbus 330 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]0.00[/font]
4 [font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Boeing 767 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]0.32[/font]
5 [font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Saab 340 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]0.33[/font]
6 [font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Boeing 757 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]0.35[/font]
7 [font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]McDonnell MD-80 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]0.43[/font]
8 [font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Boeing 737 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]0.60[/font]
9 [font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]BAE 146 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]0.64[/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]10 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Airbus 319/320/321 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]0.67[/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]11 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Fokker 100 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]0.71[/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]11 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Embrader 120 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]0.71[/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]13 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]L-1011 Tristar [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]0.91[/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]14 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Boeing 747-400 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1.04[/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]15 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Boeing 727 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1.05[/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]16 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]McDonnell DC-9 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1.29[/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]17 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Airbus 300 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1.34[/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]18 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Airbus 310 [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]1.83[/font]

​

How many crashes are due to the ACTUAL A/C failing? Most crashes are due to human factor, not A/C "taking over". These stats don't prove a dang thing in my mind.